How Proposition 13 destroyed California.

[Wreckem]

Without prop 13 California wouldnt have grown at the rate it did. Allowing property tax rates for businesses to rise will just hasten CA's fall. And yes CA is falling, its going to lose a House seat after 2010 in all likelyhood. To bad the removed district couldnt be that rat Waxmen.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

So let me get this straight... a bill that doesn't allow the state to tax people into oblivion to support its spending fantasies is to blame?

Medicaid is what is sinking California.... extending those benefits to *ILLEGAL*!!!11!11 HIGHLIGHED!!11! immigrants rather than just deporting them didn't help either. Oh yeah... teaching kids of illegals... illegals in jails... they don't have a drain on the system either.

Nope... blame a visionary who saw all this shit coming. That's the problem. Typical. Liberal. Bullshit.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
So let me get this straight... a bill that doesn't allow the state to tax people into oblivion to support its spending fantasies is to blame?

Medicaid is what is sinking California.... extending those benefits to *ILLEGAL*!!!11!11 HIGHLIGHED!!11! immigrants rather than just deporting them didn't help either. Oh yeah... teaching kids of illegals... illegals in jails... they don't have a drain on the system either.

Nope... blame a visionary who saw all this shit coming. That's the problem. Typical. Liberal. Bullshit.

Right wing wackos just live in a fantasy world. Your low tax, low services, anti-labor policies have proven a failure in the states that follow them.
California grew into an economic powerhouse under the higher tax, higher services polices. It's educational system and economy has only fallen since you right wing wackos got a law passed, prop 13, that brought your failed policies to California.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
So let me get this straight... a bill that doesn't allow the state to tax people into oblivion to support its spending fantasies is to blame?

Medicaid is what is sinking California.... extending those benefits to *ILLEGAL*!!!11!11 HIGHLIGHED!!11! immigrants rather than just deporting them didn't help either. Oh yeah... teaching kids of illegals... illegals in jails... they don't have a drain on the system either.

Nope... blame a visionary who saw all this shit coming. That's the problem. Typical. Liberal. Bullshit.

Right wing wackos just live in a fantasy world. Your low tax, low services, anti-labor policies have proven a failure in the states that follow them.
California grew into an economic powerhouse under the higher tax, higher services polices. It's educational system and economy has only fallen since you right wing wackos got a law passed, prop 13, that brought your failed policies to California.

You're so fucking delusional it's hillarious. Just keep making shit up... maybe someone will believe you. Cali is in trouble for exactly the opposite of what you suggest.

Prop 13 was passed in 1978... This is not a new thing. Are you really trying to blame a 30 year old propery tax bill on California's current economic crisis? :lmao; Cali's problems go waaaaay beyond that.

Cali's crisis is due to the pressure to care for, educate and protect people who shouldn't be here. It's that simple. That's liberal thinking... not sound conservative fiscal practices.

Not that cali adheres to either line of thinking... but the reality of cali's problems is just like the rest of the US... It's not a question of income... it's a question of spending. Nobody ever seems to question the spending end of the equasion... that's a given. Hence the problem... We need more money to spend.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: DLeRium

Originally posted by: Slew Foot

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Woofmeister
Dude, Proposition 13 was passed thirty-one years ago. And Prop. 13 notwithstanding, California still has the tenth highest property tax rates in the Country. In addition, with the exception of Hawaii, California has the highest marginal income tax rates in the Country and the highest sales tax rate in the Country.

You can say much about the citizens of the Golden State, but one thing you surely cannot say is that they are undertaxed.

Exactly. Prop 13 limits our property tax to what 1.2%? Seriously. My house is worth $1.7 million. Try taking $20,400 out of your paycheck every year. Ok, fine. 0.48% as that article states which is average. $8160.
You fail at reading your own table.

CA is ranked 45 in tax rate with a tax of 0.48%

But property costs 3-5 times as much as anywhere else so the overall amount collected is much more.

Yeah and my house is worth $1.7 million. Prop 13 limits you to 1.2% of the value of your house. Try taking $20k out of your paycheck every year. Fine 0.48% like that stupid article had the average pegged at because our property taxes apparently don't inflate as quickly. $8200. Good luck.

And once again, why isn't spending being scrutinized enough? Californian liberals already voted down Props 1A - 1E, so it's a clear sign no one wants to be taxed more. Let's tackle our spending problem already.

Also, while CA ranks #45 in relative property tax rate which someone brings up, the fact that property is worth so much brings our net $$ amount up to rank 10. It's not that we need to be taxed the same RATE as other states because it's not like cost of government spending is 2 - 3x other states, thus while our rate is only 0.48%, the dollar figure should be ENOUGH. So unless our salaries are like 2x more, it's kinda hard for us to pay ridiculous property tax rates that you feel we deserve to pay.

I think I see why Californians support Prop 13, they have no idea how government should function. Creating prop 13 did not reduce the tax burden people pay and removing it will not increase your taxes.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Slew Foot

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Woofmeister
Dude, Proposition 13 was passed thirty-one years ago. And Prop. 13 notwithstanding, California still has the tenth highest property tax rates in the Country. In addition, with the exception of Hawaii, California has the highest marginal income tax rates in the Country and the highest sales tax rate in the Country.

You can say much about the citizens of the Golden State, but one thing you surely cannot say is that they are undertaxed.

You fail at reading your own table.

CA is ranked 45 in tax rate with a tax of 0.48%

But property costs 3-5 times as much as anywhere else so the overall amount collected is much more.

But property costs 3-5 times as much as anywhere else so the overall cost for government is much more

 

[ebaycj]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Slew Foot

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Woofmeister
Dude, Proposition 13 was passed thirty-one years ago. And Prop. 13 notwithstanding, California still has the tenth highest property tax rates in the Country. In addition, with the exception of Hawaii, California has the highest marginal income tax rates in the Country and the highest sales tax rate in the Country.

You can say much about the citizens of the Golden State, but one thing you surely cannot say is that they are undertaxed.

You fail at reading your own table.

CA is ranked 45 in tax rate with a tax of 0.48%

But property costs 3-5 times as much as anywhere else so the overall amount collected is much more.

But property costs 3-5 times as much as anywhere else so the overall cost for government is much more

The ownage is strong.

 

[alphatarget1]

Originally posted by: techs

Blah blah blah

Federal personal+corporate income tax has nothing to do with how the states are run. I have always been taught at a young age to save money for emergency, and don't spend what I don't have. Apparently legislators (mostly liberals, but also "conservatives" in the case of GWB's presidency) never learned that.

I thought liberals are all about helping out the "poor" and "spreading the wealth"?

 

[alphatarget1]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

[edit] California is my home state, the northern part specifically, and it hurts to see it struggling. Ironically the legalization of marijuana would be the most incredible boon to my home county, pulling it out of poverty and neglect and into a profitable agricultural center...

California is also my home state. I left in 2007 to Texas for grad school and I'm glad I did. I personally don't think so much has to do with political ideology that ran California into the ground, but rather inept politicians pursuing their selfish goals that did the trick.

I would say considering how CA spends so much money on its welfare programs and there are still a TON of ghettos that it is an utter failure. Illegal immigration did provide cheap labor, but I would say the majority of them didn't have health insurance, car insurance, etc. I'm not an expert in this area but a sane thing to do is to look at the problem comprehensively and implement the right solution. Politicians didn't do that. They did what the lobbyists want them to do/did whatever they can to strengthen their political base. Somebody got rich (developers, etc) while the taxpayers foot the bill for problems associated with illegal immigration.

It's really a combination of things...

 

[alphatarget1]

Originally posted by: techs

Right wing wackos just live in a fantasy world. Your low tax, low services, anti-labor policies have proven a failure in the states that follow them.

Fail. Just look at the Midwest and the South with the auto industry. Hell, non-unionized plants build better cars than unionized shops! I'm shocked!

The United States isn't Europe. We can't tax the sh!t out of people and expect that things will go fine. Why don't you ask Europeans how well their system is doing now (and in the very near future) that they have a large influx of "non-native" population?

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: alphatarget1

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
Can I ask, and I am honestly ignorant and would love a real answer, what are some of the most fiscally prudent states? What do they do differently? Is there any reason California (and Washington, where I currently am, which is nearly as bad a state) couldn't emulate their tax/spend methods?

Liberals ruin states.

See NY, IL, CA, ... the list goes on.

Do you REALLY want to go there?
Or have you REALLY forgotten the hundreds of threads that show how the 'liberal' policies have created FAR more wealth in the states you mentioned than in the 'conservative's states? Not to mention higher education, greater productivity, better health, etc, etc? Or how conservative states have failed? So much so that the "liberal" states you mention have to pour billions of dollars every year into the 'conservative' states to keep them afloat? Or that if those liberal states would only receive back from the Federal government what they pay those states would have HUGE surpluses?

Really, you don't want to go there.

Techs, CA and NY will always generate more wealth than midwestern states due to their resources, no matter who is in power there. Production of wealth is very different from wise fiscal management though.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: alphatarget1

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
Can I ask, and I am honestly ignorant and would love a real answer, what are some of the most fiscally prudent states? What do they do differently? Is there any reason California (and Washington, where I currently am, which is nearly as bad a state) couldn't emulate their tax/spend methods?

Liberals ruin states.

See NY, IL, CA, ... the list goes on.

Do you REALLY want to go there?
Or have you REALLY forgotten the hundreds of threads that show how the 'liberal' policies have created FAR more wealth in the states you mentioned than in the 'conservative's states? Not to mention higher education, greater productivity, better health, etc, etc? Or how conservative states have failed? So much so that the "liberal" states you mention have to pour billions of dollars every year into the 'conservative' states to keep them afloat? Or that if those liberal states would only receive back from the Federal government what they pay those states would have HUGE surpluses?

Really, you don't want to go there.

Techs, CA and NY will always generate more wealth than midwestern states due to their resources, no matter who is in power there. Production of wealth is very different from wise fiscal management though.

NY "resources"????????

 

[JeepinEd]

I posted this in another thread, but I think it's very relevant to this thread as well.

Here is an interesting article regarding Proposition 13 Text

According to the newsrooms and editorial boards of the L.A. Times and the Sacramento Bee -- heck, even according to the Bee's cartoonist -- Proposition 13 is the devil. The 1978 voter initiative limiting increases in property taxes has so reduced revenue that it has hollowed out vitally needed public services and played a key role in the state's descent into utter dysfunction, blah blah blah blah.

The Times and the Bee folks aren't just saying this as yet another rhetorical salvo in their never-ending push for higher taxes, right? Surely they have hard proof on their side, right?

Wrong. Dead wrong. Utterly wrong. Mind-bendingly wrong. So wrong as to be downright mendacious.

Remember, Prop. 13 is not a hard cap of property taxes. Levies are adjusted to current market value when property changes hands. And that happens all the time.

According to the latest info from the Board of Equalization -- look at it here -- total property taxes collected in 2006-07 were $43.16 billion.

The oldest property tax stats I could find were for 1980-81, from caltax.org. That year, property tax revenue was $6.36 billion.

So since shortly after Prop. 13's adoption, property tax revenue increased by 579 percent. That is not a typo. It went up 579 percent.

During the same span, population went from 24 million to 38 milion -- an increase of 58 percent.

As for inflation, as of January 1981, the rough midpoint of the 1980-81 fiscal year, the Consumer Price Index -- which gauges inflation -- was 88. As of January 2007, it was 202.4. That is a 133 percent increase.

REVISED SAT. MORNING: So property tax revenue has increased far more than the combined rate of inflation and population growth. Kris Vosburgh of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers and commenter Robert Greer both said my initial calculations on this were too high. Their say property tax revenue has gone up 84 percent faster than combined inflation and population growth. Which, of course, is still far more than the combined rate of inflation and population growth. END REVISE.

Oh, yeah, Prop. 13 is the devil. Prop. 13 is our biggest problem -- not the state's inability to live within its means. Why? Because we say it. Who cares what the numbers show? Numbers are for nerds.

All right, let's bring in some "context" -- the favorite claim of those who dismiss plain facts is that the numbers are not being discussed in "context." According to LAO's wonderful searchable budget database, in 1980-1981, the total of all general and special fund revenue for the state of California was $22.1 billion. For 2006-07, it was $120.7 billion. Here is an Excel spreadsheet documenting this. That is an increase of 555 percent.

You follow? PROPERTY TAX REVENUE WENT UP FASTER THAN OTHER SOURCES OF REVENUE!

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: JeepinEd
I posted this in another thread, but I think it's very relevant to this thread as well.

Here is an interesting article regarding Proposition 13 Text

According to the newsrooms and editorial boards of the L.A. Times and the Sacramento Bee -- heck, even according to the Bee's cartoonist -- Proposition 13 is the devil. The 1978 voter initiative limiting increases in property taxes has so reduced revenue that it has hollowed out vitally needed public services and played a key role in the state's descent into utter dysfunction, blah blah blah blah.

The Times and the Bee folks aren't just saying this as yet another rhetorical salvo in their never-ending push for higher taxes, right? Surely they have hard proof on their side, right?

Wrong. Dead wrong. Utterly wrong. Mind-bendingly wrong. So wrong as to be downright mendacious.

Remember, Prop. 13 is not a hard cap of property taxes. Levies are adjusted to current market value when property changes hands. And that happens all the time.

According to the latest info from the Board of Equalization -- look at it here -- total property taxes collected in 2006-07 were $43.16 billion.

The oldest property tax stats I could find were for 1980-81, from caltax.org. That year, property tax revenue was $6.36 billion.

So since shortly after Prop. 13's adoption, property tax revenue increased by 579 percent. That is not a typo. It went up 579 percent.

During the same span, population went from 24 million to 38 milion -- an increase of 58 percent.

As for inflation, as of January 1981, the rough midpoint of the 1980-81 fiscal year, the Consumer Price Index -- which gauges inflation -- was 88. As of January 2007, it was 202.4. That is a 133 percent increase.

REVISED SAT. MORNING: So property tax revenue has increased far more than the combined rate of inflation and population growth. Kris Vosburgh of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers and commenter Robert Greer both said my initial calculations on this were too high. Their say property tax revenue has gone up 84 percent faster than combined inflation and population growth. Which, of course, is still far more than the combined rate of inflation and population growth. END REVISE.

Oh, yeah, Prop. 13 is the devil. Prop. 13 is our biggest problem -- not the state's inability to live within its means. Why? Because we say it. Who cares what the numbers show? Numbers are for nerds.

All right, let's bring in some "context" -- the favorite claim of those who dismiss plain facts is that the numbers are not being discussed in "context." According to LAO's wonderful searchable budget database, in 1980-1981, the total of all general and special fund revenue for the state of California was $22.1 billion. For 2006-07, it was $120.7 billion. Here is an Excel spreadsheet documenting this. That is an increase of 555 percent.

You follow? PROPERTY TAX REVENUE WENT UP FASTER THAN OTHER SOURCES OF REVENUE!

Yeah, people in the 'low tax' state of New Hampshire pay over 3.5 times the property tax as they do in California. Even the people in KANSAS pay over 2.5 times the property tax as they do in California.
Property tax is one of the VERY few taxes the rich can't avoid paying. Which is why some billionaire (warren buffet?) commented he paid LESS tax on his ten million dollar home in California than his secretary paid on her house in New York.
So the rich have saved hundreds of billions of taxes over the years in California.
More than enough to straigten out Californias problems.
Its just the radical right wing conservatives sabotaged California.

I just copied and pasted that from my previous response.
Read it. Your gobleydegook about how property taxes collected went up faster than inflation doesn't mean shit. California is getting 3.5 times less on property than New Hampshire and 2.5 times less than Kansas.
Face the FACTS.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: JeepinEd
I posted this in another thread, but I think it's very relevant to this thread as well.

Here is an interesting article regarding Proposition 13 Text

According to the newsrooms and editorial boards of the L.A. Times and the Sacramento Bee -- heck, even according to the Bee's cartoonist -- Proposition 13 is the devil. The 1978 voter initiative limiting increases in property taxes has so reduced revenue that it has hollowed out vitally needed public services and played a key role in the state's descent into utter dysfunction, blah blah blah blah.

The Times and the Bee folks aren't just saying this as yet another rhetorical salvo in their never-ending push for higher taxes, right? Surely they have hard proof on their side, right?

Wrong. Dead wrong. Utterly wrong. Mind-bendingly wrong. So wrong as to be downright mendacious.

Remember, Prop. 13 is not a hard cap of property taxes. Levies are adjusted to current market value when property changes hands. And that happens all the time.

According to the latest info from the Board of Equalization -- look at it here -- total property taxes collected in 2006-07 were $43.16 billion.

The oldest property tax stats I could find were for 1980-81, from caltax.org. That year, property tax revenue was $6.36 billion.

So since shortly after Prop. 13's adoption, property tax revenue increased by 579 percent. That is not a typo. It went up 579 percent.

During the same span, population went from 24 million to 38 milion -- an increase of 58 percent.

As for inflation, as of January 1981, the rough midpoint of the 1980-81 fiscal year, the Consumer Price Index -- which gauges inflation -- was 88. As of January 2007, it was 202.4. That is a 133 percent increase.

REVISED SAT. MORNING: So property tax revenue has increased far more than the combined rate of inflation and population growth. Kris Vosburgh of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers and commenter Robert Greer both said my initial calculations on this were too high. Their say property tax revenue has gone up 84 percent faster than combined inflation and population growth. Which, of course, is still far more than the combined rate of inflation and population growth. END REVISE.

Oh, yeah, Prop. 13 is the devil. Prop. 13 is our biggest problem -- not the state's inability to live within its means. Why? Because we say it. Who cares what the numbers show? Numbers are for nerds.

All right, let's bring in some "context" -- the favorite claim of those who dismiss plain facts is that the numbers are not being discussed in "context." According to LAO's wonderful searchable budget database, in 1980-1981, the total of all general and special fund revenue for the state of California was $22.1 billion. For 2006-07, it was $120.7 billion. Here is an Excel spreadsheet documenting this. That is an increase of 555 percent.

You follow? PROPERTY TAX REVENUE WENT UP FASTER THAN OTHER SOURCES OF REVENUE!

Prop 13 encourages bad government. It breaks the link between the budget and a tax rate.

 

[JeepinEd]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: JeepinEd
I posted this in another thread, but I think it's very relevant to this thread as well.

Here is an interesting article regarding Proposition 13 Text

According to the newsrooms and editorial boards of the L.A. Times and the Sacramento Bee -- heck, even according to the Bee's cartoonist -- Proposition 13 is the devil. The 1978 voter initiative limiting increases in property taxes has so reduced revenue that it has hollowed out vitally needed public services and played a key role in the state's descent into utter dysfunction, blah blah blah blah.

The Times and the Bee folks aren't just saying this as yet another rhetorical salvo in their never-ending push for higher taxes, right? Surely they have hard proof on their side, right?

Wrong. Dead wrong. Utterly wrong. Mind-bendingly wrong. So wrong as to be downright mendacious.

Remember, Prop. 13 is not a hard cap of property taxes. Levies are adjusted to current market value when property changes hands. And that happens all the time.

According to the latest info from the Board of Equalization -- look at it here -- total property taxes collected in 2006-07 were $43.16 billion.

The oldest property tax stats I could find were for 1980-81, from caltax.org. That year, property tax revenue was $6.36 billion.

So since shortly after Prop. 13's adoption, property tax revenue increased by 579 percent. That is not a typo. It went up 579 percent.

During the same span, population went from 24 million to 38 milion -- an increase of 58 percent.

As for inflation, as of January 1981, the rough midpoint of the 1980-81 fiscal year, the Consumer Price Index -- which gauges inflation -- was 88. As of January 2007, it was 202.4. That is a 133 percent increase.

REVISED SAT. MORNING: So property tax revenue has increased far more than the combined rate of inflation and population growth. Kris Vosburgh of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers and commenter Robert Greer both said my initial calculations on this were too high. Their say property tax revenue has gone up 84 percent faster than combined inflation and population growth. Which, of course, is still far more than the combined rate of inflation and population growth. END REVISE.

Oh, yeah, Prop. 13 is the devil. Prop. 13 is our biggest problem -- not the state's inability to live within its means. Why? Because we say it. Who cares what the numbers show? Numbers are for nerds.

All right, let's bring in some "context" -- the favorite claim of those who dismiss plain facts is that the numbers are not being discussed in "context." According to LAO's wonderful searchable budget database, in 1980-1981, the total of all general and special fund revenue for the state of California was $22.1 billion. For 2006-07, it was $120.7 billion. Here is an Excel spreadsheet documenting this. That is an increase of 555 percent.

You follow? PROPERTY TAX REVENUE WENT UP FASTER THAN OTHER SOURCES OF REVENUE!

Yeah, people in the 'low tax' state of New Hampshire pay over 3.5 times the property tax as they do in California. Even the people in KANSAS pay over 2.5 times the property tax as they do in California.
Property tax is one of the VERY few taxes the rich can't avoid paying. Which is why some billionaire (warren buffet?) commented he paid LESS tax on his ten million dollar home in California than his secretary paid on her house in New York.
So the rich have saved hundreds of billions of taxes over the years in California.
More than enough to straigten out Californias problems.
Its just the radical right wing conservatives sabotaged California.

I just copied and pasted that from my previous response.
Read it. Your gobleydegook about how property taxes collected went up faster than inflation doesn't mean shit. California is getting 3.5 times less on property than New Hampshire and 2.5 times less than Kansas.
Face the FACTS.

Face the facts?
The facts are that even if prop 13 was not in effect, we would still be in the same situation because our legislature can't control it's spending. Their spending, coupled with the massive union payoffs and yes, our current initiative spending, has led us to where we are today.

As has been stated repeatedly, although our property taxes are lower, the cost of homes is much higher than most other states. It's a smaller percentage of a larger dollar figure. It's very difficult for anyone to be able to afford a house in CA to begin with, but you propose making it even more difficult? Do you live here? Do you know what the cost of living is here?
A household making 50K will barely be able to live comfortably and would be hard pressed to be able to afford a home, yet that household is also at the top of California's Income Tax rate.

If California would keep it's spending in line with inflation, and our initiative process was revised to require a source of income to pay for new spending, we would not be in this predicament.

After handing out the biggest tax hike in American history, you are proposing eliminating the only protection we have from the legislators raising our property taxes to outrageous amounts? How's about just reduce spending to 2004 levels?

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: JeepinEd

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: JeepinEd
I posted this in another thread, but I think it's very relevant to this thread as well.

Here is an interesting article regarding Proposition 13 Text

According to the newsrooms and editorial boards of the L.A. Times and the Sacramento Bee -- heck, even according to the Bee's cartoonist -- Proposition 13 is the devil. The 1978 voter initiative limiting increases in property taxes has so reduced revenue that it has hollowed out vitally needed public services and played a key role in the state's descent into utter dysfunction, blah blah blah blah.

The Times and the Bee folks aren't just saying this as yet another rhetorical salvo in their never-ending push for higher taxes, right? Surely they have hard proof on their side, right?

Wrong. Dead wrong. Utterly wrong. Mind-bendingly wrong. So wrong as to be downright mendacious.

Remember, Prop. 13 is not a hard cap of property taxes. Levies are adjusted to current market value when property changes hands. And that happens all the time.

According to the latest info from the Board of Equalization -- look at it here -- total property taxes collected in 2006-07 were $43.16 billion.

The oldest property tax stats I could find were for 1980-81, from caltax.org. That year, property tax revenue was $6.36 billion.

So since shortly after Prop. 13's adoption, property tax revenue increased by 579 percent. That is not a typo. It went up 579 percent.

During the same span, population went from 24 million to 38 milion -- an increase of 58 percent.

As for inflation, as of January 1981, the rough midpoint of the 1980-81 fiscal year, the Consumer Price Index -- which gauges inflation -- was 88. As of January 2007, it was 202.4. That is a 133 percent increase.

REVISED SAT. MORNING: So property tax revenue has increased far more than the combined rate of inflation and population growth. Kris Vosburgh of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers and commenter Robert Greer both said my initial calculations on this were too high. Their say property tax revenue has gone up 84 percent faster than combined inflation and population growth. Which, of course, is still far more than the combined rate of inflation and population growth. END REVISE.

Oh, yeah, Prop. 13 is the devil. Prop. 13 is our biggest problem -- not the state's inability to live within its means. Why? Because we say it. Who cares what the numbers show? Numbers are for nerds.

All right, let's bring in some "context" -- the favorite claim of those who dismiss plain facts is that the numbers are not being discussed in "context." According to LAO's wonderful searchable budget database, in 1980-1981, the total of all general and special fund revenue for the state of California was $22.1 billion. For 2006-07, it was $120.7 billion. Here is an Excel spreadsheet documenting this. That is an increase of 555 percent.

You follow? PROPERTY TAX REVENUE WENT UP FASTER THAN OTHER SOURCES OF REVENUE!

Yeah, people in the 'low tax' state of New Hampshire pay over 3.5 times the property tax as they do in California. Even the people in KANSAS pay over 2.5 times the property tax as they do in California.
Property tax is one of the VERY few taxes the rich can't avoid paying. Which is why some billionaire (warren buffet?) commented he paid LESS tax on his ten million dollar home in California than his secretary paid on her house in New York.
So the rich have saved hundreds of billions of taxes over the years in California.
More than enough to straigten out Californias problems.
Its just the radical right wing conservatives sabotaged California.

I just copied and pasted that from my previous response.
Read it. Your gobleydegook about how property taxes collected went up faster than inflation doesn't mean shit. California is getting 3.5 times less on property than New Hampshire and 2.5 times less than Kansas.
Face the FACTS.

Face the facts?
The facts are that even if prop 13 was not in effect, we would still be in the same situation because our legislature can't control it's spending. Their spending, coupled with the massive union payoffs and yes, our current initiative spending, has led us to where we are today.

As has been stated repeatedly, although our property taxes are lower, the cost of homes is much higher than most other states. It's a smaller percentage of a larger dollar figure. It's very difficult for anyone to be able to afford a house in CA to begin with, but you propose making it even more difficult? Do you live here? Do you know what the cost of living is here?
A household making 50K will barely be able to live comfortably and would be hard pressed to be able to afford a home, yet that household is also at the top of California's Income Tax rate.

If California would keep it's spending in line with inflation, and our initiative process was revised to require a source of income to pay for new spending, we would not be in this predicament.

After handing out the biggest tax hike in American history, you are proposing eliminating the only protection we have from the legislators raising our property taxes to outrageous amounts? How's about just reduce spending to 2004 levels?

I love this flawed line of thinking. Taxes are so high in CA because of Prop 13. If it wasn't for eliminating the stablest form of taxes CA wouldn't have a bankrupt government ever 7 or 8 years.

 

[Pneumothorax]

Originally posted by: JeepinEd

After handing out the biggest tax hike in American history, you are proposing eliminating the only protection we have from the legislators raising our property taxes to outrageous amounts? How's about just reduce spending to 2004 levels?

It's hopeless, the pro-tax posters here either are too rich to care or don't own any property. So for them it's "Bring on the taxes!"

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: JeepinEd
After handing out the biggest tax hike in American history, you are proposing eliminating the only protection we have from the legislators raising our property taxes to outrageous amounts?

I thiought there was something called "elections" that provided some protection if legislators raised taxes too high.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Pneumothorax

Originally posted by: JeepinEd

After handing out the biggest tax hike in American history, you are proposing eliminating the only protection we have from the legislators raising our property taxes to outrageous amounts? How's about just reduce spending to 2004 levels?

It's hopeless, the pro-tax posters here either are too rich to care or don't own any property. So for them it's "Bring on the taxes!"

Or maybe anyone with a shred of common sense knows that if you want to control taxes first you need to control spending.

 

[Pneumothorax]

Originally posted by: Craig234


I thiought there was something called "elections" that provided some protection if legislators raised taxes too high.

There is no protection from this in a solid blue state like CA. "Why should I care about taxes, when I can get the benefits and someone else has to pay for them." You can put an accused child molester Democrat for SF Mayor and he'd still win over a republican.

 

[TheSkinsFan]

Originally posted by: Double Trouble
Sounds like they need to change the law to mandate that any proposed project be required to identify how it's going to be funded.

What a concept!! If only...

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Pneumothorax

Originally posted by: Craig234


I thiought there was something called "elections" that provided some protection if legislators raised taxes too high.

There is no protection from this in a solid blue state like CA. "Why should I care about taxes, when I can get the benefits and someone else has to pay for them." You can put an accused child molester Democrat for SF Mayor and he'd still win over a republican.

So, you are suggesting that we get rid of demoracy in blue states? You are saying is doesn't work, so if you aren't saying to get rid of it, why not?

Of course, you misrepresent the situation IMO - your logic seems to be the sort that says "cut the workers' pay to the bone - and then say since they pay low taxes, they don't deserve any say.' You appear not to value the workers much at all, as if their contribution of labor is unimportant.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Pneumothorax

Originally posted by: JeepinEd

After handing out the biggest tax hike in American history, you are proposing eliminating the only protection we have from the legislators raising our property taxes to outrageous amounts? How's about just reduce spending to 2004 levels?

It's hopeless, the pro-tax posters here either are too rich to care or don't own any property. So for them it's "Bring on the taxes!"

Or maybe anyone with a shred of common sense knows that if you want to control taxes first you need to control spending.

So, you spend less, and then the problems that brings lowers productivity, lowering revenue, so you spend less, and the problems that brings lowers productivity...

And then you rename the state something catchy like "Mississippi" and declare it a capitalist paradise.

 

[piasabird]

Tax Undocumented workers at a higher rate. Tax the Medical Marijuana at a higher rate.

Just spend less money.